I’ve always been critical about the last factor: prominence (AKA: writing about something
simply because it happened to a famous person or writing about something
someone did simply because that person happens to be famous).
Today, every single one of my breaking news apps erupted
with the latest story: George Clooney has been arrested while protesting in a
Sudan Protest in Washington. Check it out:
It almost looks like a joke. Clooney is laughing with his
buddies, smirking slyly at the countless cameras while police calmly escort he
and the others away from the scene. It seems like a publicity stunt to me and
all the top news outlets are falling for it.
My critique of these stories is not rooted in the content of
the protest, and I’m certainly not suggesting
Clooney should not protest. He
has the freedom to protest just like any other American. My concern lies in the
tendency of journalists to jump on every opportunity to publicize the actions
of celebrities.
Here are some other "breaking news" alerts I received today:
It just makes me wonder: Is the Clooney story on-par with the other two? Would reporters have jumped on the Clooney story if it would have been an average citizen who was arrested?
My answer: No.
Journalists are supposed to give a voice to the voiceless, not give a megaphone to the famous. As journalist, I suggest we give a little more thought to why we are covering a story and if it's actually worthy of the front page of the paper, the A- block of a newscast, or the top story on the website.




I totally agree with you.
ReplyDelete